Was Stephen Hawking right or wrong about the Black Hole information loss paradox? And Please join my mailing list here 👉 briankeating.com/list ✉️ for more resources from this episode!😅
Well, what do you mean by "information"? If you are asking if the black hole changes in size when mass falls in then yes.. Information escapes the black hole. If by "information" you mean reconstructing something after it's fallen in then I say probably not.
is a black hole required ? information exists with in a conscious brain before it is transcribed to an external medium. what becomes of that information at death? why is this only a "black hole" paradox?
So grateful that Professor Susskind released his Stanford 101 courses on youtube as well as many of his lectures for all eyes to see. That's more than 200 hours of freely available content. Shows he is not only a talented researcher but also an incredibly skilled teacher. Also, grateful Nick Zentner from University of Central Washington released his 101 classes and ongoing studies on youtube. As a committed hiker, I feel less stupid whenever I stumble on a stone, watch the next ridge, or contemplate the stars at night. Puts things physical in perspective.
Absolutely love this intelligent conversation between two public intellectuals, each of whom has a sense of humor and cares more about knowledge than ego.
Roger Penrose tells us that information is not lost, but it is removed. all information is imbedded in space time, where else would it be? What changes is the size of space time, but the ratio of information to space time stays the same. For example when information is remove so is the portion of space time that the information resides in, both fall into the black hole. Imagine 10 teacups, in each teacup resides a marble.The rule of the teacup universe is that each teacup must contain a marble... there are no exceptions to this rule. The job of monitoring the teacup universe is given to Lenny Susskind. On his rounds he has to make sure there is no contravening of the teacup rule. One teacup is removed leaving 9 teacups; no rules have been contravened.... all is well, and so on for all the teacups. Lenny does not find a single teacup empty; the ratio of marbles to teacups haven't changed, the universe has not lost information, it has simply reduced in size. Roger Penrose proposes this is what happen to information and eventual all information and it equivalent space time will lie behind the event horizon. Of course eventually the black holes evaporate leaving an empty universe of marbles of unmeasurable size.
Always enjoy hearing Dr. Susskind interviews. He’s such a talented teacher. He’s so talented, in fact, that even a computer scientist like me can watch his lectures and understand the big picture of the Universe as described by General Relativity.
I'm a high school teacher. Hearing him talk about why he likes to explain things really resonated. If you really want to get better and understanding your craft, throw in some teaching. You'll find out pretty quickly in what areas you should be confident, and in what areas you might be fooling yourself.
A legend who after so many years of fundamental physics gifted an entropic principal . I salute his courage in looking the world around us. Thank you for a good channel.
I think Prof Suskind is one the most remarkable personalities I have come across not only in terms of brilliance and clarity of thought but also a teacher. His humility humbles us all .I wish his all the success in his endeavors and hope he will be honored with a Nobel Prize which he rightly deserves .
Great interview and great guest, than you Dr Brian! Have you ever thought of inviting Samir Mathur ? His Fuzzball conjecture seems like a very interesting resolution of the black hole paradox.
I'm a baby boomer whom fitted in despite my humble beginnings. Lucky was me to have countenance enough to work my way into the system and enough nous to take advantage. Now I'm 70 and haven't needed to work for a living since I was 40; 30 yrs of freedom, watching and thinking and indeed finding my own path leads me to be contrary. Now my consciousness leads me back to the days when we 1st saw geometry in the structure we see.
Leonard Susskind has an amazing intellect and is a phenomenal communicator. I did not want this episode to end. I hope you have him on over and over again!
The correlation of electrons outside and inside a black hole would be lost. Might as well pass one through a polarizer and the other not. Local hidden variable (LHV) math just needs to compare one result vs another without regard to the total, and you get a curve that fits experimental graphs better than the QM cos prediction graph... especially near the 0's where the error bars are highest. ( A+B=2C; A/C+B/C=2; a=A/C; b=B/C; a+b=2; (b-a)/b and (a-b)/a depending on whether A or B is larger; in the case of a quantum experiment in units of quarter-turn, (x-(2-x))/x or (2-x-x)/(2-x) ; ( 2x-2)/x or (2-2x)/(2-x) depending if x > 1 or < 1; where 0 is 0 degrees, 1 is 90 degrees, and 2=180 degrees. ) It's a multi-part equation, but ever so simple. The more accurate the experiment the better this curve fits. atomic nuclei are outside of space and cause the curvature of space; things like electrons and photons travel through space, and are not outside of space - I don't see why it's so hard to get to this conclusion. The nuclear cross section of an atomic nucleus measures smaller than it really is - since, like black holes, photons get lensed around the nucleus and only when heading directly head-on into the particle does it really 'see' and react to the forces outside of space. A black hole is really just a super large nucleus, so if an electron falls into a nucleus, is it still valid to call it entangled/correlated with any other electron? That two nuclei take a lot of energy in order to actually interact is because space has a sort of surface tension (quantified as the strong force). The strong force between black holes is almost irrelevant though. The universe happens to be a perpetual motion machine; there is no absolute tend towards entropy, because curved space causes matter to fall together and become coherent and structured; while at a certain limit that organized matter becomes radioactive and throws itself back out into the universe, only to be collected later. Black holes emit more than just 'hawking radiation'; but I'll save that rant for another day. It's too bad he's not more available to toss ideas at; but then my ideas are so foreign they're of course just from a noob who knows nothing about anything, and should be ignored. *shrug* At least noone will scoop my theory before I have the experiment(s) done.
Thanks so much! *What was your favorite takeaway from this conversation?* _Please join my mailing list to get _*_FREE_*_ notes & resources from this show! Click_ 👉 briankeating.com/list
I respect Leonard Susskind as a scientist but I think he is a little naive, about the dishonesty and corruption of his fellow scientists in the field. first of all their is dishonesty in almost every field of human endeavor especially when money and stature are involved.
Dr.Susskind, try FPV as a hobby. It doesn't need to be to be with quadcopters or flying wings... Just try it with rc cars. A crawler would be the perfect first candidate, because they're slow, but go over almost anything, so you can sit down and explore. What I would recommend is Walksnail as the video system and ExpressLRS as the radio link. Anyway... In case of any questions, be free to ask me. 😊
We give too much credit to folks in this field. We make them celebrity status. People idolize them. In the end what do they really acvomplish? NADA!!!!
It's a blessing for Hawking not to experience all these. Otherwise his whole achievement as a theoretical physicist would have come to a waste. Or maybe he could come up with a better theory. So far, I think Roger Penrose is the most reasonable physicist. Rather than proposing a multiverse system, he goes for cyclical universe. We'll never know, but I do believe that there is no such thing as the absolute beginning.
Brian, I find your false modesty disingenuous. I’ve heard you refer to yourself as “a nobody” or similar many times. Yet you are clearly a brilliant, accomplished person who’s known and respected by many, many people. Do you really think you’re a nobody? Clearly not. So why say it?
I realize that nothing within the universe can violate the second law of thermodynamics, but to say that the universe itself cannot violate the second law of thermodynamics seems like a category error.
He really put you back into place Brian. You kept asking him stupid personal questions about god and his jewish heritage and you clearly irritated him, it is also clear how he feels politically towards you
So Susskind did not understand CCC. A bit sad. Note Susskind validates CCC against at least the entropy problem, since information cannot be lost, Penrose's next Aeon has exactly the same entropy as the previous. Right? The entropy of a cosmological spacetime does not ever change, it is a constant (unless Fred Hoyle was right).
The Hawling temperature is a Planck equation, kind of equation. So, if meter/s^2 ~ The Hawking Unruh Temperature, includes Planck mechanics, then G, Newtonian mechanics is in the T too. 🌊
@51:00 I agree with Lenny about those cultural arguments being unscientific. But (a) that does not make them wrong, and (b) he's forgetting the anthropic arguments are unscientific too, because they rely upon anthropology, they are anthropocentric, violating perhaps the most cherished notion in science, observer independence. (Don't tell me QM is observer dependent, that'd also be baloney, since what QM has is that measurements are context dependent, but that's not observer dependence). Suppose humans never came to be, but all the other life did. Sure, we'd not be around to make the Anthropic arguments, but you can then see there is no "because" - the other paramount principle of science you see, the principle of causality. You cannot throw that one away. It'd be sad if a old old school working class leftie turned to postmodernism. But I guess he half has in thinking Baraka Obama is someone to be admired. No neoliberal has ever been a decent politician, left-wing nor right-wing nor centrist. They're all scum of the earth, or, to be charitable, either ignorant or frauds. Are we saying these days you get points merely for not starting too many new wars or color revolutions? Ah... nevertheless, I love Lenny, he's my hero, his wife was feeding him trash NY Times bestseller list crap. Can't be blamed. I was fooled once.
@48:00 interesting that CPT-Symmetric proposal undermines Lenny's case here for eternal inflation multiverse. In fact, CPT-Symmetry does a lot more than give flatness, isotropy and small +Λ, it also looks on track to get dark matter ν right. (little-one joke there).
The fact he came up with string theory within a day of another scientist just reinforces my suspicions that consciousness and mind is outside of the body as well within, which leads me to the belief or suspicion of a soul. The us patent office is filled with this phenomenon . Also I can no longer dismiss countless other examples paranormal phenomena. The atheist arguments are getting very hard to believe.
@@terrycrynant9777 Yes. It’s a nuisance hitting the button to get more info but they generally don’t state it’s a repeat in the titles. At least this one does state the original date of the talk. Most just show the upload date.
He seems like a very nice person. I also like his very reasonable support for the multiverse and the anthropic principle, far too much stupid criticism of those things in my opinion. I like how he said that the objections to the multiverse and anthropic principle are basically political or cultural rather than scientific.
One thing that most eminent physicist recognise is that the second law can never be overturned…… and observation constantly confirms that. So any theory that claims to sideline entropy isn’t based on observation but rather theoretical assumptions. The reality is that entropy allows for a dynamic universe which presently causes work to be done and provides useful energy. Without entropy we wouldn’t be here………
In my hand I hold a rock, ancient, maybe older than the flood, a crystalline rock cut in facets, one side shows a star system and in it a solar system. At the squared off end the head of a cat, on another side an ancient horse; and on the other side geometry. Information from long ago stored on a crystal. Is it from our stone age or from another age? Was it a museum piece in a land once upon a time? Wonders me now we can store information on crystal structure if there is more to see! It came to me out of history and belongs to me.
The Simulation Hypothesis assumes that consciousness can only be created by computation and thus excludes all other possibilities that are uncomputable. My Anti-Simulation Hypothesis states that since there may be infinitely many other possibilities for consciousness to emerge other than by computation alone, the probability of living in a simulation is close to zero.
Brian, you should interview iconoclastic Prof. Alexander Unzicker, whose physics videos are available at his RU-vid channel Unzicker's Real Physics. Dr. Unzicker is not convinced that black holes even exist. So you might want to have him debate Susskind on the subject. Unzicker is not shy about, in person, confronting iconic physicists regarding their ideas. He has done so with Ed Witten (at one of his lectures) and with David Gross (in an interview).
3:00 "Apparently no one has read the whole back and no one understands it, so why did you write it?". Well that's nonsense. I read the whole book and it got me interested in physics. 20 years later, I'm now familiar with Hermitian operators, and fourier transforms, and Riemann curvature tensors and all sorts. Plenty of people get something out of popular science books, and in some cases it does lead people to pursue the topic in greater mathematical detail. And for those who just end up having the book on the shelf, in order to impress guests, well... if he got to put his daughter through college, everyone's happy. All seems fine to me!
Hello from Kazakhstan. We can create an educational and practical device and practically master Einstein’s theories of relativity or obtain, for example, new physics: Postulate 1. Light is an ordered vibration of gravitational quanta. Postulate 2. The speed of light, regardless of the source, within the “framework of the dominant gravitational field” This is determined experimentally using a hybrid fiber optic gyroscope (based on Michelson's experiment 1881-2015). Using a hybrid fiber optic gyroscope, the straight-line speed of vehicles can be measured.
In the cosmic theater where theories collide, A tale unfolds of intellect, side by side. Brian Keating, a stargazer's mind, In the celestial tapestry, wisdom enshrined. A whisper of discord, a scientific strife, In the dance of cosmos, a tumultuous life. War with Hawking, a tempest in thought, Susskind and Keating, the clash they sought. Leonard Susskind, with strings in hand, In the realms of physics, a maestro grand. Strings that vibrate in the cosmic sea, A symphony of particles, an intellectual decree. Brian Keating, an explorer of cosmic seas, In the fabric of space, where mystery flees. A war declared, ideas in combat dance, In the arena of knowledge, where intellects enhance. Hawking's specter looms, a black hole's might, A cosmic puzzle, a scientific fight. Susskind and Keating, minds aglow, In the realm of theory, where starlight does flow. Keating's quest for echoes, a cosmic hum, Bouncing off the cosmos, a celestial drum. In the swirl of inflation, a cosmic race, Against Hawking's theories, a challenging embrace. Yet in the clash of intellects, ideas entwine, A dance of minds, in the cosmic design. War not of conflict, but of thoughts profound, In the pursuit of knowledge, where wisdom is found. Keating and Susskind, a cosmic ballet, In the theater of ideas, where scholars play. In the end, not war, but understanding's light, A celestial truce in the cosmic night.
There are many Creative Physicists, nearly as many Theories... still, few concrete answers. Hawking & Susskind are Two Of Them...... I tend to lean toward Prof, Susskind in many matters e.g. the Conservation of Information and others.
Thanks so much! *What was your favorite takeaway from this conversation?* _Please join my mailing list to get _*_FREE_*_ notes & resources from this show! Click_ 👉 briankeating.com/list
Perhaps Penrose is right about the universe as a perpetual motion engine, if the overall energetics of the universe as an isolated system is in some way similar to the never-ending energy of quantum particles
@@lepidoptera9337 is that because parts of the universe eventually travel apart at faster than causality? Anyway, where does all the energy in the universe go, if not within the same universe?
@@joebenham27 The problem is that in the classical definition of systems systems are exchanging energy, momentum, angular momentum and charge with each other. This is what causes their evolution. The universe can't exchange anything with another system, so technically we can't really say that it evolves. This is sometimes denoted with a trivial formula Hpsi_universe=0, i.e. the Hamilton operator applied to the wave function of the universe is zero. This is intellectual nonsense because we can't even assign a wave function to the universe... one can't make an ensemble of universes (i.e. an infinite repetition of the "universe experiment"). So the way we usually understand physics (as a divide and conquer strategy) just doesn't work on "the whole".
Thanks so much! *What was your favorite takeaway from this conversation?* _Please join my mailing list to get _*_FREE_*_ notes & resources from this show! Click_ 👉 briankeating.com/list
@@DrBrianKeating That there are many lessons to learn from the old timers and that the holographic principle is in good hands, especially in the realm of celestial holography.
We need a theory of quantum mechanics which can distinguish between the following: (1) The interaction between an alpha particle and two molecules of nitrogen trifluoride. (2) The interaction between an alpha particle and two molecules of nitrogen tri-iodide. According to me that theory will involve tachyonic Brownian motion, but other suggestions are welcome. I think that when we get that theory, we will find that Hawking was right.
Whenever god is invoked as a solution to how we're here, it always requires an explanation of how god got here. God's god's god is as subject to nature as we are. Unless you can prove the existence of some or other being-- it really isn't necessary to pretend there is one.
To say that a cyclic universe would be a perpetual motion machine and therefore impossible isn't true. It fails to take into account the reason why perpetual motion machines are impossible within the universe. Within the universe a perpetual motion machine is impossible because energy is always transferred to another part of the universe through some process. But speaking of the universe as a whole the energy isn't lost it is conserved within itself. But if the energy is lost, lost to where? Energy doesn't leak out of the universe it is still a part of it. So applying the same reason as to why perpetual motion machines are impossible within the universe doesn't hold up when talking about the universe as a whole. In fact the universe as a whole is the only circumstance where a perpetual motion machine is possible and not just possible but likely.
Reality is such that we will never know all, however comprehensible reality is. It is easy to escape with 'I don't know', but to pretend to know what singularity or a big bang is and then admit 'I don't know' is not acceptable. Neither is it a mark of greatness to deprive Nambu what credit is due to him. Even though we don't know how to prove divine design, we cannot avoid admitting there was a design, it is a mark of greatness whoever can admit it. Avoiding it is cowardice.
Very interesting very educational. Question, we know The Cosmos existed before the big bang and time is man made; why did S Hawkins say time started at the big bang? And What would happen if the universe stopped expanding and retracted regarding gravity? Would it effect any planits axis? Ty
Perfect... Steven said it exactly right... information gets lost in black holes.... they have already found the important answer...namely the singularity point of the universe yet they continue on rabbit black holes to find another answer than what was found in that singular point.... God.
I always liked Hawking for his very useful views as a perfect example of learning by exclusion. It appeared to me what ever he stated was almost exactly the opposite of reality. A person almost always wrong.
One of the greatest scientist’s of our time just told us 5+15 = 23 @ 4:34 of the podcast. 2005 I wrote that book - let me do the arithmetic that would be 15 years ❤❤❤ maybe this was recorded in 2020? Obviously a mistake, but that was cute … Great guest..
Dear Prof Susskind I was first very skeptical about you but it didn't stop me to watch mote of what you have to say😂 Because I really want to understand more😅 Thank you ❤ Also many thanks to you Brian❤ Best Cleaning Lady Berlin/Germany
1:03:38 it just stuck me that consciousness is non-evolving. It is what it is. Probably always has been. So I think he’s right that computers will reveal something for us…but my bet is that it will be that we possess something that is not engineer-able.
